NSIAD-91-273FS Chemical and Biological Warfare: …Es244664 ” ,J ‘ Cost data for collective protection devices was only available for a lim- ited number of weapon systems. The

CHEMICAL ,rlND BIOLOGICAL WmE’ARE

Use of Collective Protection on Vehicles, Aircraft, and Ships

(;AO/NSIAI)-!)I-27:1 1%

-----_---._

GAO United States General Accounting Office Washington, D.C. 20548

National Security and International Affairs Division

B-244664

September 5,1QQl

The Honorable John Conyers, Jr. Chairman, Legislation and National

Security Subcommittee Committee on Government Operations House of Representatives

Dear Mr. Chairman:

This fact sheet responds to your request for information on the mili- tary’s efforts to protect personnel in combat vehicles, aircraft, and ships against chemical and biological warfare contamination. Specifically, we identified (1) congressional legislation and the Department of Defense (DOD) and service regulations that address collective protection devices that limit contamination,l(2) weapon systems within each service that were equipped with collective protection devices, and (3) where avail- able, costs to equip weapon systems with these devices.

Results in Brief Collective protection has gained the attention of Congress, DOD, and the services. The’Congress twice directed the Army to report on its efforts to protect weapon systems with some form of collective protection. Moreover, the congressional requirement that the Navy develop pro- grams to improve the survivability of combatant ships also led to a focus on collective protection. DOD and all the services have issued regu- lations requiring consideration of collective protection devices for weapon systems that may perform their missions in a chemical and bio- logical warfare environment.

The Army has equipped 24 of its 40 existing armored systems with some type of collective protection; the Navy has equipped seven ships with various types of collective protection, Both the Army and the Navy plan to equip other systems in the future. The Air Force, however, has not equipped its aircraft with this protection because historically it has emphasized individual rather than collective protection.2

iCollective protection devices provide filtered air to an enclosed compartment of a weapon system. These devices can include (a) overpressure systems that provide filtered air to the entire crew com- partment creating positive air pressure, thus prohibiting the entry of contaminants and enabling the crew to breathe normally without any additional gear; and (b) ventilated face pieces that provide filtered air to the crew through individual air hoses attached to a central filter unit.

“Individual protection equipment comprises a mask or hood with an individual or forced air respi- rator, such as a ventilated face piece, a battle dress overgarment, boots, and gloves.

Page 1 GAO/NSIAD-91-273 Fs CMlective Protection Systems

:

Es244664

” ,J ‘Cost data for collective protection devices was only available for a lim-

ited number of weapon systems. The Army estimated that it costs about $47,000 to protect an Abrams MlAl tank. Navy officials told us that it would cost about $200,000 to retrofit one section of most types of ships,

Legislation Focused On several occasions, the Congress has directed the services to focus

Attention on Chemical ?i n on their combat systems’ chemical and biological survivability. Authorization Act for fiscal year 1978, Public Law 95-79,

and Biological required the Secretary of the Army to submit to the House and Senate

Survivability Armed Services Committees its plan for including collective protection on armored combat vehicles being developed or procured in fiscal year 1981. In response, the Army reviewed eight systems to determine which systems would benefit most from this protection. Of the eight systems, four received some type of protection, two received no protection, and two systems were canceled.

,/ The/MD Authorization Act for fiscal year 1979, Public Law 95-485, required the Navy to develop plans and programs for the construction and deployment of combatant ships with an increased capacity for survivability. The Navy interpreted this requirement to include collec- tive protection.

Most recently, the fiscal year 1991 Conference Report on Appropria- tions for the Department of Defense {H. R. Conf. Rep. 101-938) required the Army to review the requirements for nuclear, biological, and chem- ical protection on armored systems and report to the Congress by June 1991 on these requirements. The Army was instructed to provide its plans to meet these requirements. The Army reported that it had devel- oped varying requirements for 53 current and future armored systems. 6 These requirements were primarily based on the battlefield mission of each system. The Army also reported that its approach to meeting these requirements was a trade-off between cost, schedule, and available tech- nology. Although the Army had initiated programs to enhance the nuclear, biological, and chemical protection of its systems, it concluded that its current armored systems were able to fight on a contaminated battlefield, Army officials told us that all armored systems could operate in a contaminated environment because the crew was protected by either collective protection devices or individual protective gear.

Page 2 GAO/NSIAD-91-273 FS Collective Protection Systems

B-244664

-

DOD and the Services DOD and the services issued regulations that addressed the use of collec-

Address Chemical and tive protection devices to prevent chemical and biological contamina- t. ion. F or example, to increase the chemical and biological survivability Biological Warfare of its ships (in response to the DOD Authorizatign Act of fiscal year

1979), the Navy (1) issued Navy Instruction9t!l70.1, which addressed survivability requirements for most types of ships; (2) required collec- tive protection on some new ships; (3) obtained cost estimates from con- tractors to retrofit some existing ships with collective protection; and (4) researched in-house development of less costly collective protection devices. *Regulations were issued that stated that all systems that may perform their mission in a chemical and biological environment would include survivability features so that they could continue operations.3 These regulations also required that the use of devices to minimize con- tamination be addressed during weapon systems’ design and acquisition.

Army Equipped Most Most Army combat vehicles have some type of collective protection

Vehicles With Protection Devices

device. The Army, in its 1978 report to the Congress, stated that on the basis of cost and mission most armored vehicles would benefit more from the ventilated face pieces than from overpressure devices. Conse- quently, (as appendix I shows) 23 of 40 existing systems are currently equipped with ventilated face pieces, but only two of these systems are equipped with overpressure devices, One additional system, the XM93 Fox Nuclear, Biological and Chemical Reconnaissance Vehicle, is equipped with an overpressure device, but does not have a ventilated face piece system.

When an overpressure system is combined with ventilated face pieces, the combination is called a hybrid system. All MlAl tanks have a “total collective protection system,” which consists of the hybrid system and L air conditioning. Appendix II provides a diagram of the collective pro- tection system on the MlAl tank. Although the Fox vehicles do not have ventilated face pieces, the Army installed air conditioning in the vehicles prior to Operation Desert Storm.

At the time of our review, the Army planned to include overpressure collective protection on the (1) Block III Main Battle Tank, (2) Line of

%DD and each service addressed collective protection in the following regulations!,DCD Instruction 4245.13, Design and Acquisition of Nuclear, Biological, and Chemical Contamination Survivable Sys- tems, June 198n’Army Regulation 70-71, Nuclear, Biological, and Chemical Contamination Survivability of Army Materiel, May 1984; Headquarters Air Force Statement of Op$rationaI Need 004-86, Sustained Operations in a Chemical/Biological Environment, Dec. 1986; andOffice of Naval Operations Instruction S3400.10E, Chemical Warfare and Chemical, Biological, and Radiological Defense Policy, July 1991.

Page 3 GAO/NSIAD91-273 Fs Collective Protection Systems

B-244664

Sight Anti-Tank, (3) Future Infantry Fighting Vehicle, (4) Combat Mobility Vehicle, (6) Future Armored Resupply Vehicle-Ammunition, and (6) Advanced Field Artillery System as part of its armored system modernization program.

Navy Equipped a Few Ships With Protection 33 ships out of a fleet of about 450 ships would be covered by collective Devices protection: including 15 destroyers, 14 amphibious ships, and 4 auxil-

iary replenishment ships. Appendix III provides a detailed description of these ships. Of the 33 ships, 6 amphibious ships and 1 destroyer were already in the fleet.

The Navy has three levels of collective protection, Level I protects living spaces for at least 40 percent of the crew and medical facilities; level II adds key operational spaces; and level III provides the maximum cov- erage that is practical.4 Most ships have either level I protection or level I plus their combat information centers,” because their designs were essentially complete when the decision was made to include collective protection. The DDG-51 destroyer is the first ship to provide level III protection. Appendix IV provides a diagram of the DDG-5 l’s collective protection coverage.

Although relatively few of the Navy’s ships have collective protection ,devices, Navy officials told us that most Navy ships are equipped with features that help minimize contamination in a chemical or biological environment. These features include (1) ventilation fans and fittings (designated as “Circle William”), which can be shut down; (2) “water washdown systems,” which cleanse the ships’ exterior; and (3) airtight and watertight compartments, with separate ventilation systems on some,

The Navy is developing a collective protection system that would pro- tect selected areas on existing ships. This system would maintain a con- taminant-free environment in critical areas of a ship, providing a safe haven or protecting mission-essential spaces. The system is expected to

4According to the Navy, it is impractical to protect engine rooms and flight decks with collective protection.

““Combat information center” refers to the section of a ship manned and equipped to collect and collate tactical information.

Page 4 GAO/NSIAJ&91-273 I% Collective Protection Systems

‘.‘,$ 1

B-244664

be fielded in mid-1994 and is a less expensive alternative to protecting an entire ship.

Air Force Did Not Equip Aircraft With Protection Devices

Air Force officials knew of no aircraft with collective protection and told us that no plans existed to include such devices on existing or future aircraft. These officials told us that the crew was protected inside the aircraft with individual protection garments and breathing apparatuses.

Costs to Equip Army Only limited information was available on the cost of collective protec-

and Navy Systems tion devices in weapon systems. Production and installation costs to equip the MlAl tank with collective protection were about $47,000 each. Navy officials estimated that equipment and installation costs to protect one section of an existing ship would cost about $200,000. Since the Navy anticipates protecting at least two sections per ship, each installation will be at least $400,000.

Army officials provided the following reasons for not being able to give us more definitive cost estimates on their systems, In many cases, the cost estimates for collective protection on combat’vehicles were out- dated, Regarding the Fox reconnaissance vehicle, the Army cannot dif- ferentiate the cost to protect the vehicle from other vehicle costs. Navy officials told us that costs to install collective protection devices on newly constructed ships were so enmeshed with other costs that they were difficult to identify.

Scope and Methodology

In performing our work, we interviewed officials of DOD's Office of the * Assistant to the Secretary of Defense for Atomic Energy; the Army’s Space and Special Weapons Office, Nuclear, Biological, and Chemical Division; Chemical Research, Development, and Engineering Center; Tank and Automotive Command; the Office of the Chief of Naval Opera- tions; Naval Sea Systems Command; Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Acquisition; and Wright-Patterson Air Force Base. We reviewed congressional legislation, DOD’S and the services’ regulations, and other documents related to chemical and biological defense and col- lective protection devices. We limited our review to: (1) Army combat vehicles, (2) aircraft only within the Air Force, and (3) all Navy ships.

Page 5 GAO/NSIAD-91-273 Fs Collective Protection Systems

We conducted our review between March and August 199 1. Although we did not obtain written agency comments, we discussed a draft of the fact sheet with DOD officials and incorporated their comments as appropriate.

Unless you publicly announce its contents earlier, we plan no further distribution of this fact sheet until 7 days from its issue date. At that time, we will send copies to interested congressional committees; the Secretaries of Defense, the Army, the Navy, and the Air Force; and the Director, Office of Management and Budget. Copies will also be made available to others upon request.

Please contact me at (202) 275-4141 if you or your staff have any ques- tions concerning this fact sheet. Appendix V provides a list of major con- tributors to the fact sheet.

Sincerely yours,

Richard Davis Director, Army Issues

Page 6 GAO/NSIAD-91-273 FS Cdlective Protection Systems

Page 7 GAO/NSIAD91-273 FS Collective Protection Systems

Appendix I

Army Combat Vehicles: Status of Collective Protection Devices

Vehicle x~gj -....- -..“_-_--_.- Fox Nuclear, Biological and Chemical Reconnaisance Vehicle

Ml .-. Abrams Tank MlPl.

~. _.._ -- _..._ ---- Abrams Tank

MlAl _.... - . . ---_

Abrams Tank M2 “’

. _ __-. -- Bradley Fighting Vehicle

M3 ‘. Bradley Fighting Vehicle M2A1 -.-.- -g--~ley’fighting Vehicle

.^_ ---_-.- M3Al Bradley Fighting Vehicle M2A2

I.. ._._. -. ̂ _ Bradley Fighting Vehicle

M3A2 Bradley Fighting Vehicle M9

_..... -.-._ Armored Combat Earthmover

M60Al Armored Vehicle Launcher Bridge

Ventilated Overp~~bss~e None face piece

X X X _- X X

x --___ X -__.

X X -.--___ X -- X ---__ X --I_____-.______ X

M60Al -“- -_.. .- ._.. -

Combat Tank -..--

X M60A3 dombatTank---

M88Al “- Recovery Vehicle M106Al 107mm Mortar Carrier - _. .--.” _... - M106A2. 107mm Mortar Carrier Mld9A2 Self-Propelled 155mm Howitzer MlOSA3. Self-Propelled 155mm Howitzer - I..-.-__- M109A4. Self-Propelled 155mm Howitzer M 109A5

.” __.. -- Self-Propelled 155mm Howitzer

Ml lOA Self-Prooelled 8 inch Howitzer

X X

x -__- X .~. X X

X X- ------.-

X Ml 13A2 Armored Personnel Carrier X -- Ml 13A3 Armored Personnel Carrier X M270 Multiple Launch Rocket System Launcher X- X M548Al. Cargo Carrier

-__ ---______- -__ X ~___~ ---_-

M551 Al Armored Reconnaisance Airborne Assault Vehicle X --_______-___ M577Al Command Post Carrier X M577A2 Command Post Carrier X * M578

. ..- . . ..__ _____- ----...__- Light Recovery Vehicle X _... -- .___ ~

M728 Combat Engineer Vehicle X _---. M730Al Chapparal Missile Carrier X .- . . ---_ -___ -__.------... M730A2 Chapparal Missile Carrier X M741 Al Vulcan 20mm Carrier X -__-.--- M90lAl Improved Tube-launched, Optically-tracked, Wire-guided Missile Vehicle X -___--- M981 Frre Support Team Vehicle Combat Carrier X .-.I___ M992 Field Artillery Ammunition Support Vehicle - 155mm X M993 Multiple Launch Rocket System Carrier X M1615Ai Electronic Shelter Carrier

-__- X --____-__

Ml059 Smoke Generator Carrier X

Page 8 GAO/NSIA.D91-273 Fs Collective Protection Systems

Appendix II

Total Collective Protection System’ for the MlAl Abrams Tad

,- Ventilated Face Pieces 1

Conditioned Air

‘This system includes ventilated face pieces, an overpressure system, and conditioned air.

Page 9 GAO/NSIAD-91-273 F’S Cdlective Protection Systems

Appendix III

Navy Ships Constructed With Collective Protection Systems (CPS)

Ship tvoe Status Year to be delivered

Number CPS IeveP of zonesd

Amphibious Shlps: LHA.S/USS Belleau Wood LHD.1 /USS Wasp _. ._._. LHD.2/Essex LHD-3/Kearsage

..__... ----

LHD.rZ/Boxer -.. _ LSD.44/USS Gunston Hall

in fleet in fleet

in construction in construction in construction

in fleet

.

.

1992 1993 1994

.

b 2 I 2 I 2 --- I 2 I 2

I + CC” 1 LSD-45/USS Comstock in fleet . I + cc 1 LSD-46/USS Tortuga _-.- . .._ LSD-47/USS Rushmore L.SD48/Ashland LSD-49fHarpers Ferry LSD-50 LSD-51 LSD52

in fleet in fleet

in construction in construction

planned planned planned

. I + CIC 1

. I + cc i 1992 I + CIC 1 1993 I + CIC 1 1994 - I + CIC 1 1994 I + CIC 1 1995 I + CIC 1 -__

Destroyers: DDG.51/USS Arleigh Burke DDG*52/John Barry DDG-53/John Paul Jones “. .__ DDG.54/Curti&Wilbur

_ -.--.-______

in fleet in construction in construction in construction

. III 4 1992 Ill 4 1992 III 4 -__ 1993 Ill 4

DDG55JStout DDG-56/John S. &Cain

in construction in construction

-- 1993 Ill 4 1993 --__ III 4 --- -.___ ---~-_

DDG57/Mrtscher in construction 1994 III 4 ..~- -- DDG58/Laboon in construction 1994 Ill 4 -. DDG-59/60/61 plant% 1994 III 4 DDG62/63/64/65

___- __--..-.-_-- planned 1995 Ill 4 L

Auxiliary Replenishment Ships: AOE-G/Supply

-.--I__ in construction 1992 III 4 .__~____

AGE -//Paul Hamilton in construction 1993 III 4 -. -._-- -- AOE 8 planned 1993 Ill 4

AGE-9 planned - _. ---

1994 III 4

‘Level I protects living spaces for at least 40 percent of the crew and provides medical facrlrties; level II adds key operational spaces; and level Ill provides the maximum coverage that is practical.

bThe LHA-3’s CPS does not fit any established CPS level.

cCIC - Combat Information Center

d”Number of zones” refers to protected sections of ships.

Page 10 GAO/NSIAD-31-273 FS Colkctive Protection Systems

Pressure Zones Created by Collective Protection Systems Aboard the DDG-51 Arleigh Burke Class Destroyer

Level III Colleotive Protection

,(.. czl ,+:’ .:: 2.; Machinery spaces not protected by collective protection systems,

Note: Level III collective protection refers to the maximum coverage that is practical.

Page 11 GAO/NSIAD-91-273 FS Collective Protection Systems

.

Ppe

ktG;r Contributors to This Fact Sheet

National Security and Henry L. Hinton, Associate Director

International Affairs John R. Henderson, Assistant Director Derek B. Stewart, Evaluator-in-Charge

Detroit Re@ona1 Office Robert W. Herman, Regional Management Representative Rickey J. Belanger, Site Senior Allen R. Walter, Evaluator

Cincinnati Regional Office

Bruce Fairbairn, Regional Management Representative Don Springman, Evaluator

(BHB442) Page 12 GAO/NSIAD-91-273 FS Collective Protection Systems

Orttcrs Illily atso tW ptaWd by calling (202) 275624 1.

. - . . . ~ . _ - - _ _ . - . _ . _ _ . . _ - . . _ . . . - . . _ _ . _ . - - _ . . . . . . _ . _ _ - ^ . _ l _ l _ , _ I _ _ ~ _ “ L ~ ~ - I ” ~ ~ ~ - -

()f”l ’i c * i i l l h s i w s s